Page 5, 26th June 1964

26th June 1964
Page 5
Page 5, 26th June 1964 — Does Radio matter any more?
Close

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.

Tags


Share


Related articles

Challenge For Vatican Radio

Page 14 from 12th October 1962

Need A Swivel Chair

Page 5 from 4th October 1957

`goldie' Is Quite O"'

Page 3 from 24th June 1966

Television Am) Radio

Page 7 from 3rd April 1964

A Time For The Poet To Help

Page 7 from 24th August 1956

Does Radio matter any more?

Sir,—As one not possessing a television set, I find myself appalled at the lack of interest shown by your paper in the radio. For some time I have been tempted to draw the attention of your Radio and TV critic to the fact of the existence of the former medium. Now I see that you have forestalled me by banishing it from his terms of reference! This seems to me a retrograde step. Do you really consider radio to be no longer significant? I only wish I could quote cornparaiive figures for the numbers of man-hours spent in watching and listening to help you rectify your attitude. Let's face it. TV is a grossly over-rated phenomenon and the absurd emphasis it is currently given leads to great abuses. For example, it seems generally to be assumed that the TV supplants the radio, whereas it is surely more realistic to acknowledge that the two are complementary. Haven't we all seen 1V programmes in which the necessity for a picture was a positive embarrassment?

A recent development which seems to have passed unnoticed is the ending of the radio programme "Christian Outlook". It was a sort of religious magazine. Bearing in mind the obvious difficulties confronting it, I was always impressed by its avoidance of prejudice, the sheer sanity of its news comment (quite the best I have heard) and its absorbing interest. In fact. the amount of common ground among Christians to which it bore evidence must have contributed greatly to the spirit of ecumenism.

Now that it has gone, one cannot but wonder why it was ever

deemed inappropriate, while simultaneously regretting the consequent loss of opportunity for lay participation in religious broadcasting. Could it he that lack of publicity contributed to its downfall?

I. 1. G. Berry Orpington, Kent, James Graham writes: / must plead not guilty to the major charge of ignoring the existence of radio as I have discussed radio programmes in the column on several occasions.

1 would make a qualified plea to the second charge of regarding radio cu no longer significant. There are exceptions—such as the radio programme Mr. Berry mentions—but the fart remains that radio at present attracts its greatest audience during the day when It provides little more than a musical background noise. In the evening its audience drops well below that of TV.




blog comments powered by Disqus